By way of example, DE 100 24 320 A1 discloses a radar device for object protection, which has a firing container. Firing containers such as these, or launchers, are subject to the problem of oscillation, at least while in use. The stabilization of launchers while the load in use is applied, taking account of the shock comparability, in this case, however, represents a technical problem. Many launchers and associated switching cabinets are damped by metal cable dampers, or the like. However, these measures are often not sufficient to prevent oscillation, for example, as a result of firing sequences.
Dampers such as these are marketed, for example, by the Socitec Company, inter alia in the product ranges Polycal, Half-Helical or Helical (http://www.socitec.fr/).
Even if the use of a disruptive damping element is considered, this has the disadvantage that a factor of 5 or more is generally required in order to significantly increase the stiffness of the system. This then leads to a very high residual shock, which cannot be absorbed by the system. Because of the unpredictable firing sequences, the launcher can still oscillate at the natural frequency, as a result of which it is still possible for intolerable discrepancies to occur in the firing angle.
DE 20 2005 011 008 U1 discloses a further stabilizing device in particular for a launcher, which is distinguished in that stabilization is provided in addition to a known damper system, for example, a metal cable damper etc., and is held together at least by a shear bolt. The bolt shears off after or with a shock effect, and the damper system can absorb the shock. The stabilization and the associated design are, in this case, able to move freely in all directions so that, despite the shear bolts, no parts will fly off, the structure remains intact in its function, and only the bolt is retrofitted. In one particular embodiment, the solution allows the launcher to be fixed for the operating load (firing, movement), the damping movement to be provided in the event of a shock, in order to avoid overloading of the installation, and recreation of the stiff state after a shock, by simple means.
The object of the invention is therefore to specify a further simple design option for counteracting oscillation when subject to the load when in use.